Skip to main content
×
Home

Human security benchmarks: Governing human wellbeing at a distance

Abstract
Abstract

When the United Nations Development Programme formally introduced the concept of human security in 1994, it was widely celebrated as a long-overdue humanist alternative to orthodox models of security. Today, human security is a buzzword for describing the complex challenges that individuals and communities face in achieving safety and wellbeing in an insecure world. This article directs attention away from the emancipatory and empowering qualities commonly ascribed to human security to explore, instead, the specific role of benchmarking within the wider human security agenda. The main focus here is on the ways in which human life has been operationalised, measured, and classified to create indicators that permit judgements about individual security and insecurity. The article argues that although a single global human security benchmark has yet to be established, the main indices used as performance metrics of human insecurity have produced a narrow understanding of what it means to live a ‘secure’ life and have reinforced the state as the main focal point of international security governance.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Human security benchmarks: Governing human wellbeing at a distance
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Human security benchmarks: Governing human wellbeing at a distance
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Human security benchmarks: Governing human wellbeing at a distance
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

This article benefitted from insightful comments by three anonymous reviewers, André Broome and Joel Quirk, and the participants of the Benchmarking in Global Governance (BiGG) Workshop held at the University of Warwick 12–14 March 2014. Any omissions or errors remain the author’s own responsibility. The research was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/K008684/1).

Footnotes
References
Hide All

1 Sears Dudley, The Political Economy of Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), p. 130.

2 Schumpeter Joseph, ‘The common sense of econometrics’, Econometrica, 1:1 (1933), pp. 512 (p. 12).

3 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Human Development Report (HDR) 1994 (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994), available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/255/hdr_1994_en_complete_nostats.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014.

4 Paris Roland, ‘Human security: Paradigm shift or hot air?’, International Security, 26:2 (2001), pp. 87102; Martin Mary and Owen Taylor, ‘The second generation of human security: Lessons from the UN and EU experience, International Affairs, 86:1 (2010), pp. 211224.

5 See, for example, Thomas Nicholas and Tow William T., ‘The utility of human security: Sovereignty and humanitarian intervention’, Security Dialogue, 33:2 (2002), pp. 177192; Bellamy Alexander J. and McDonald Matt, ‘The utility of human security: Which humans? What security? A reply to Thomas and Tow’, Security Dialogue, 33:3 (2002), pp. 373377; Newman Edward, ‘Critical human security studies’, Review of International Studies, 36:1 (2010), pp. 7794; Burgess J. Peter, ‘The ethical challenges of human security in the age of globalization’, in Moufida Goucha and John Crowley (eds), Rethinking Human Security (Chichester: Wiley Blackwell and UNCESCO, 2008); Pettman Ralph, ‘Human security as global security: Reconceptualizing strategic studies’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 18:1 (2005), pp. 137150.; Suhrke Astri, ‘Human security and the interests of states’, Security Dialogue, 30:4 (1999), pp. 265276; Liotta P. H. and Owen Taylor, ‘Why human security?’, Whitehead Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations VII: Winter/Spring (2006), pp. 137155.

6 Krause Keith, ‘Building the agenda of human security: Policy and practice within the human security network’, International Social Science Journal, 59:1 (2008), pp. 6579 (p. 78).

7 Hynek Nik and Chandler David, ‘Introduction: Emancipation and power in human security’, in David Chandler and Nik Marhia (eds), Critical Perspectives on Human Security: Rethinking Emancipation and Power in International Relations (Abingdon: Routledge, 2011), pp. 110.

8 See Christie Ryerson, ‘Critical voices and human security: To endure, to engage or to critique?’, Security Dialogue, 41:2 (2010), pp. 169190; McCormack Tara, ‘Human security and the separation of security and development’, Conflict, Security and Development, 11:2 (2011), pp. 235260. On human security as ‘relation of governance’ and as ‘principle of formation’ see Duffield Mark and Waddell Nicholas, ‘Securing humans in a dangerous world’, International Politics, 43:1 (2006), pp. 123; Grayson Kyle, ‘Human security as power/knowledge: the biopolitics of a definitional debate’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21:3 (2008), pp. 383401.

9 See McCormack Tara, ‘The limits to emancipation in the human security framework’, in Chandler and Hyrek (eds), Critical Perspectives, pp. 99113; see also Roberts David, ‘Human security, biopoverty and the possibility for emancipation’, in Chandler and Hyrek (eds), Critical Perspectives, pp. 6982.

10 See Grayson Kyle, ‘Human security as power/knowledge’, p. 384; Mary Martin and Taylor Owen, ‘The second generation’; Stuvøy Kirsti, ‘Human security research practices: Conceptualizing security for women’s crisis centres in Russia’, Security Dialogue, 41:3 (2010), pp. 279299.

11 Broome André and Quirk Joel, ‘Governing the world at a distance: the practice of global benchmarking’, Review of International Studies, 41:5 (2015), pp. 819841.

12 Marhia Natasha, ‘Some humans are more human than others: Troubling the “human” in human security from a critical feminist perspective’, Security Dialogue, 44:1 (2013), pp. 1923 (p. 23).

13 Barnett Michael N., ‘Humanitarian governance’, Annual Review of Political Science, 16:1 (2013), pp. 379398 (pp. 381, 383). See also Fassin Didier, ‘Humanitarianism: a nongovernmental government’, in Michel Feher (ed.), Nongovernmental Politics (New York: Zone Books, 2007), pp. 149160 (p. 151).

14 Wheeler Nicholas J., Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002).

15 See Singer J. David, ‘Variables, indicators, and data: the measurement problem in macropolitical research’, Social Science History, 6:2 (1982), pp. 181217 (p. 186); also UNDP, HDR 1994, p. 3.

16 Barsh Russel Lawrence, ‘Measuring human rights: Problems of methodology and purpose’, Human Rights Quarterly, 15:1 (1993), pp. 87121 (pp. 91, 95–6); Pawson Ray, A Measure for Measures; A Manifesto for Empirical Sociology (London: Routledge, 1989), p. 40. As Singer (‘Variables’, p. 186) put it, ‘we think and theorize in terms of concepts, and our data serve as convenient surrogates that represent them and can be subjected to statistical analysis’.

17 ‘Economics of Peace: A Summary of the North South Roundtable Session in San Jose’, Costa Rica, 4–5 January 1990, available at: {http://ns-rt.org/reports/ECONOMICS%20OF%20PEACE.pdf} accessed 12 September 2014; Boutros Boutros-Ghali, ‘An Agenda for Peace: Report of the Secretary-General’ (UN Security Council, 1992), available at: {www.unrol.org/files/A_47_277.pdf} accessed 25 August 2014 (para. 16); see also the UNDP, Human Development Report (HDR) 1993 (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. iii, available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/222/hdr_1993_en_complete_nostats.pdf} accessed 12 September 2014.

18 This is based on a Factiva search of major English language print media for the phrase ‘human security’ from January 1990 to September 2014.

19 UNDP, HDR 1994, pp. 4, 22.

20 Ibid., p. 1.

21 On development as norm, see Williams David, International Development and Global Politics: History, Theory, and Practice (Abington: Routledge, 2012).

22 UNDP, HDR 1994, pp.1–2.

23 Ibid., p. 24.

24 Ibid., pp. 25–6.

25 Ibid., p. 26.

26 Ibid. Since 1993, this has become the Gross National Income (GNI). Calculated in national currency, and then converted into US$, the GNI is ‘the sum of value added by all resident producers plus any product taxes (less subsidies) not included in the valuation of output plus net receipts of primary income (compensation of employees and property income) from abroad’. World Bank, ‘GNI per capita, Atlas method (current US$)’, World Bank Open Data (2013), available at: {http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD} accessed 5 August 2014.

27 The total labour force is defined as the actual number of people available for work, both unemployed and employed.

28 The Report only notes that 0.1 % of donor countries GNP ‘channelled to the poorest nations … for basic human development priorities’ could help bring ‘all poor nations up to at least a minimum threshold of human development’. UNDP, HDR 1994, pp. 4–5.

29 Ibid., pp. 4, 6.

30 Ibid., p. 28.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid., p. 27. The 1994 HDR presents a table on ‘Indicators of food security in selected countries’, which are based on national aggregate datasets without discussing how they relate to and help to measure ‘access to food’.

33 Ibid.

34 Paris, ‘Paradigm shift’; King Gary and Murray Christopher J. L., ‘Rethinking human security’, Political Science Quarterly, 116:4 (2001), pp. 585610 (p. 589); Barnett Michael and Weiss Thomas G., Humanitarianism Contested: Where Angels Fear to Tread (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 2629; cf. OECD, Conflict, Peace and Development Co-Operation on the Threshold of the 21st Century (Paris: OECD, 1997), available at: {http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pcaaa817.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014; International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS), ‘Report: The Responsibility to Protect’ (Ottawa: International Development Research Centre, 2001), available at: {http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014); Commission on Human Security, ‘Final Report: Human Security Now’, available at: {http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/91BAEEDBA50C6907C1256D19006A9353-chs-security-may03.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014.

35 This is summarised in the ‘20:20 Compact for Human Development’. UNDP, HDR 1994, pp. 7–8; see also Clegg Liam, ‘Benchmarking and blame games: Exploring the contestation of the Millennium Development Goals’, Review of International Studies, 41:5 (2015), pp. 947967.

36 Ibid., pp. 13–14; also Gasper Des, ‘Securing humanity: Situating “human security” as concept and discourse’, Journal of Human Development, 6:2 (2005), pp. 221245.

37 On the ‘vital core’ of human life see Sabina Alkire, A Conceptual Framework for Human Security (Oxford: Centre for Research on Inequality, CRISE, 2003).

38 See Marhia, ‘Some humans are more human’, pp. 21–3, 28; Dillon MichaelGoverning terror: the state of emergency of biopolitical emergence’, International Political Sociology, 1:1 (2007), pp. 728.

39 See also Harrison James and Sekalala Sharifah, ‘Addressing the compliance gap? UN initiatives to benchmark the human rights performance of states and corporations’, Review of International Studies, 41:5 (2015), pp. 925945. Clegg, ‘Benchmarking global development’.

40 Homolar Alexandra, ‘Rebels without a conscience: the evolution of the rogue states narrative in US security policy’, European Journal of International Relations, 17:4 (2011), pp. 705727.

41 See, for example, Bellamy Alexander, ‘The Responsibility to Protect – five years on’, Ethics & International Affairs, 24:2 (2010), pp. 143169.

42 The universalism entails here ‘respecting national sovereignty but only as long as nation-states respect the human rights of their own people’. UNDP, HDR 1994, p. 14. On human security and conditional sovereignty see De Larrinaga Miguel and Doucet Marc G., ‘Sovereign power and the biopolitics of human security’, Security Dialogue, 39:5 (2008), pp. 517537 (pp. 525–8).

43 See, for example, the debates between the ‘broad school’, which advances joining together human physical safety, human dignity, and human development, and the ‘narrow school’, which focuses on individuals’ safety from violent conflicts and has received a boost after the ICISS publication, The Responsibility to Protect. See Thomas Caroline, ‘Global governance, development and human security: Exploring the links’, Third World Quarterly, 22:2 (2001), pp. 159175; Bellamy and McDonald, ‘The utility of human security’; Liotta P. H. and Owen Taylor, ‘Sense and symbolism: Europe takes on human security’, Parameters, 36:3 (2006), pp. 85102; Suhrke, ‘Human security’; Thomas and Tow , ‘Utility of human security’; see also the HDR 1994 Special Issue in Contemporary Politics, 21:1 (2015); Martin Mary and Owen Taylor (eds), Routledge Handbook of Human Security (London: Routledge, 2013).

44 See also Adler-Nissen Rebecca and Pouliot Vincent, ‘Power in practice: Negotiating the international intervention in Libya’, European Journal of International Relations, 20:4 (2014), pp. 889911.

45 See Sending Ole Jacob and Sande Lie Jon Harald, ‘The limits of global authority: How the World Bank benchmarks economies in Ethiopia and Malawi’, Review of International Studies, 41:5 (2015), pp. 9931010. Cooley Alexander and Snyder Jack (eds), Ranking the World: Grading States as a Tool of Global Governance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015); Beth Simmons A. and Kelley Judith G., ‘Politics by number: Indicators as social pressure in International Relations’, American Journal of Political Science (forthcoming 2015); Freistein Katja, ‘Effects of indicator use: a comparison of poverty measuring instruments at the World Bank’, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice (2015, online first); Davis Kevin E., Kingsbury Benedict, and Engle Merry Sally, ‘Indicators as technology of global governance’, Law and Society Review, 46:1 (2012), pp. 71104.

46 Brand Jack, ‘The politics of social indicators’, The British Journal of Sociology, 26:1 (1975), pp. 7890 (p. 79).

47 On this process of commensuration see Espeland Wendy Nelson and Stevens Mitchell L., ‘Commensuration as a social process’, Annual Review of Sociology, 24 (1998), pp. 313343 (p. 315); On commensuration and global benchmarking practices see André Broome and Joel Quirk, ‘Governing the world at a distance’.

48 See also Porter Theodore M., Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995), pp. 28, 45; On standards and benchmarking see Dominique Kathleen C., Anees Malik Ammar, and Remoquillo-Jenni Valerie, ‘International benchmarking: Politics and policy’, Science and Public Policy, 40:4 (2013), pp. 504513.

49 UNESCO-ISS, ‘Final Recommendations of the UNESO-ISS Expert Meeting on Peace, Human Security and Conflict Prevention in Africa’, Proceedings of the UNESCO-ISS Expert Meeting held in Pretoria, 23–4 July 2001, available at: {www.issafrica.org/Pubs/Books/Unesco/FinalRcomm.html} accessed 5 August 2014.

50 Henk Dan, ‘Human security: Relevance and implications’, Parameters, 35:2 (2005), pp. 91106 (p. 92).

51 De Larrinaga Miguel and Doucet Marc G., ‘Sovereign power’, p. 528. See the HDI subsection below for attempts to develop such an index. The datasets and indexes the Human Security Report Project focuses relate to a narrow understanding of human security, see, for example, Human Security Audit (2005), available at: {www.hsrgroup.org/docs/Publications/HSR2005/2005HumanSecurityReport-Part2-HumanSecurityAudit.pdf} accessed 7 May 2015.

52 UNDP, HDR 1994, p. 38.

53 See Call Charles T., ‘The fallacy of the failed state’, Third World Quarterly, 29:8 (2008), pp. 14911507; Homolar , ‘Rebels without a conscience’, pp. 719720; UN, ‘World Summit Outcome’ (2005), paras 138–9, available at: {www.unrol.org/files/2005%20World%20Summit%20Outcome.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014; United Nations Security Council (UNSC), ‘Resolution 1674’ (28 April 2006), available at: {www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C8CD3CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/Civilians%20SRES1674.pdf} accessed 25 August 2014; UNSC, ‘Resolution 1894’ (11 November 2009), available at: {www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/POC%20SRES1894.pdf} accessed 25 August 2014.

54 Marina Ottoway and Stefan Mair, ‘States at risk and failed states: Putting security first’, Policy Outlook (Carnegie Endowment of International Peace, September 2004), p. 6, available at: {www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/arbeitspapiere/statesatrisk_ks.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014.

55 Haken Nate and Taft Patricia, The Dark Side of State Building: South Sudan (Fund for Peace, 2013), available at: {http://library.fundforpeace.org/fsi13} accessed 1 August 2014.

56 Ikenberry G. John and Slaughter Anne-Marie, ‘Forging a World of Liberty Under Law, U.S. National Security in the 21st Century’, Princeton Project Papers (Final Report 2006), p. 26; Homolar-Riechmann Alexandra, ‘The moral purpose of US power: Neoconservatism in the age of Obama’, Contemporary Politics, 15:2 (2009), pp. 179196 (pp. 190–1); also US White House, The National Security Strategy of the United States (Washington, DC, 2002), p. 1; Ban Ki-moon, ‘UN Secretary-General Report on “Responsibility to Protect: Timely and Decisive Response”’ (2012), available at: {http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/component/content/article/176-the-un-and-rtop/4315-un-secretary-general-releases-report-on-responsibility-to-protect-timely-and-decisive-response} accessed 2 June 2014; ICISS, The Responsibility to Protect.

57 Mair Ottoway and, ‘States at risk’, p. 2.

58 Ibid.

59 The discussion of the FSI indicators is based on information provided by the Fund for Peace 2014 available at: {http://ffp.statesindex.org/} accessed 25 August 2014.

60 Fund for Peace, ‘Indicators’, available at: {http://ffp.statesindex.org/indicators} accessed 5 August 2014.

61 UNDP, HDR 1994, pp. 32–40.

62 Fund for Peace, ‘Indicators’.

63 Ibid.

64 Fund for Peace, ‘Name Change’, available at: {http://library.fundforpeace.org/fsi14-namechange} accessed 25 August 2014.

65 Freedom House, ‘Methodology Fact Sheet’, available at: {www.freedomhouse.org/report/methodology-fact-sheet#.U_3uNkiPL-m} accessed 25 August 2014. See also {www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2014/methodology#.VBVmT2Nvxjd} accessed 1 September 1014.

66 This discussion of methodology is based on ibid.

67 See detailed Munck Gerardo L. and Verkuilen Jay, ‘Conceptualizing and measuring democracy: Evaluating alternative indices’, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Comparative Political Studies, 35:1 (2002), pp. 534; Giannone Diego, ‘Political and ideological aspects in the measurement of democracy: the Freedom House case’, Democratization, 17:1 (2010), pp. 6897.

68 Recent subcategory scores and aggregates scores have now been made available at: {www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-aggregate-and-subcategory-scores#.VBVmKWNvxjd} accessed 14 September 2014.

69 See Gastil Raymond Duncan, ‘The comparative survey of freedom: Experiences and suggestions’, in Alex Inkles (ed.), On Measuring Democracy: Its Consequences and Concomitants (New Brunswick and London: Transaction, 1991); Munck and Verkuilen, ‘Conceptualizing and measuring democracy’; Axel Hadenius and Jan Teorell, ‘Assessing alternative indices of democracy’, Committee on Concepts and Methods Working Paper Series, Political Concepts, 6 (2005), available at: {www.concepts-methods.org/Files/WorkingPaper/PC%206%20Hadenius%20Teorell.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014; Carlsen Lars and Bruggemann Rainer, ‘The “Failed State Index” offers Morethan just a simple ranking’, Social Indicators Research, 115 (2014), pp. 525530.

70 UNDP, Human Development Report (HDR) 1990 (Oxford and London: Oxford University Press 1990), available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/219/hdr_1990_en_complete_nostats.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014); UNDP, HDR 1994, ch. 5.

71 Ibid., p. 10.

72 See Sen Amartya K., ‘Well-being, agency and freedom: the Dewey Lecture 1984’, Journal of Philosophy, 82 (1985), p. 203; UNDP, Human Development Report 2010 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), p. 16; also Sen Amartya K., Inequality Reexamined (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992); Alkire Sabina, ‘The capability approach as a development paradigm’, in Enrica Chiappero-Martinetti (ed.), Debating Global Society: Reach and Limits of the Capability Approach (Milan: Feltrinelli Foundation, 2009).

73 UNDP, HDR 1990, pp. 10, 12.

74 See UNDP, ‘Human Development Reports: Frequently Asked Questions’, available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/en/faq-page} and {http://hdr.undp.org/en/faq-page/human-development-index-hdi#t292n52} accessed 25 August 2014.

75 The thresholds set in the 2013 HDR are now relative, with country classifications based on HDI quartiles. See detailed: UNDP, ‘Technical Notes’ (2013), available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2013_en_technotes.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014.

76 Wolff Hendrik, Chong Howard, and Auffhammer Maximillian, ‘Classification, detection and consequences of data error: Evidence from the human development index’, The Economic Journal, 121:553 (2011), pp. 843870.

77 For a broad overview, see Milorad Kovacevic, ‘Review of HDI Critiques and Potential Improvements’, Human Development Research Paper No. 33 (2010), available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdrp_ 2010_33.pdf} accessed 1 September 2014.

78 Alkire Sabina and Foster James, ‘Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement’, Journal of Public Economics, 95:7–8 (2011), pp. 476487; Alkire Sabina and Foster James, ‘Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement’, Journal of Economic Inequality, 9:2 (2011), pp. 289314. The 2013 MPI is available at {www.ophi.org.uk/global-multidimensional-poverty-index-mpi-2013/} accessed 25 August 2014.

79 Chakravarty Satya R., ‘A generalized human development index’, Review of Development Economics, 7:1 (2003), pp. 99114.

80 King and Murray , ‘Rethinking human security’, pp. 590, 606; Owen cf. Taylor, ‘Human security – conflict, critique and consensus: Colloquium remarks and a proposal for a threshold-based definition’, Security Dialogue, 35:3 (2004), pp. 345387.

81 Hastings David, ‘The human security index: Potential roles for the environmental and Earth observation communities’, Earthzine (May 2011) available at: {www.earthzine.org/2011/05/04/the-human-security-index-potential-roles-for-the-environmental-and-earth-observation-communities/} accessed 25 August 2014; for the HSI see {www.humansecurityindex.org/} accessed 25 August 2014.

82 See Nussbaum Martha C., ‘Introduction’, in Martha C. Nussbaum and Jonathan Glover (eds), Women, Culture, and Development: A Study of Human Capabilities (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 136 (p. 5); Nussbaum Martha C., ‘Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and social justice’, Feminist Economics, 9:2–3 (2003), pp. 3359; Charusheela S., ‘Social analysis and the capabilities approach: a limit to Martha Nussbaum’s universalist ethics’, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33:6 (2009), pp. 11351152.

83 See Fukuda-Parr Sakiko, ‘The human development paradigm: Operationalizing Sen’s ideas on capabilities’, Feminist Economics, 9:2–3 (2003), pp. 301317; Fukuda-Parr Sakiko, ‘Rescuing the human development concept from the HDI – reflections on a new agenda’, in Sakiko Fukuda-Parr and A. K. Shiva Kumar (eds), Readings in Human Development (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 117124.

84 United Nations (UN), ‘A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility’ (2004), available at: {www.un.org/en/peacebuilding/pdf/historical/hlp_more_secure_world.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014; see also UN, ‘World Summit Outcome’ (2005), available at: {www.unrol.org/files/2005%20World%20Summit%20Outcome.pdf} accessed 5 August 2014.

85 UNDP, ‘Human Development Report’ (HDR) (2014), p. 18, available at: {http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-report-en-1.pdf} accessed 1 September 2014.

86 UNDP, ‘Frequently Asked Questions’.

87 UNDP, HDR 2014, p. 5.

88 UNDP, Towards Human Resilience: Sustaining MDG Progress in an Age of Economic Uncertainty (New York: UNDP, 2011).

89 Chandler David, ‘Resilience and human security: the post-interventionist paradigm’, Security Dialogue, 43:3 (2012), pp. 213229.

90 See King and Murray , ‘Rethinking human security’, p. 606.

91 See Owen, ‘Human security’. For a critique of these links see Waddel Nicholas, ‘Ties that bind: DfID and the emerging security and development agenda’, Conflict, Security & Development, 6:4 (2006), pp. 531555; McCormack Tara, ‘Human security and the separation of security and development’, Conflict, Security and Development, 11:2 (2011), pp. 235260; Chandler David, ‘The security-development nexus and the rise of “anti-foreign policy”’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 10:4 (2007), pp. 362386; Stern Maria and Öjendal Joakim, ‘Mapping the security-development nexus: Conflict, complexity, cacophony, convergence?’, Security Dialogue, 41:1 (2010), pp. 530.

92 De Larrinaga and Doucet , ‘Sovereign power’, p. 531.

93 Porter, Trust in Numbers, p. 21.

94 Ibid., pp. 8, 23, 74; Ward Michael, Quantifying the World: UN Ideas and Statistics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2004), p. 5.

95 Davis, Kingsbury, and Engle Merry, ‘Indicators’, particularly pp. 74–7.

96 Ibid.; Ward, Quantifying the World, pp. 11, 25.

97 Finlay Christopher J., ‘How to do things with the word “terrorist”’, Review of International Studies, 35:4 (2009), pp. 751774.

98 See Barnett Michael N., ‘Humanitarian governance’, Annual Review of Political Science, 16:1 (2013), pp. 379398 (p. 385); Grayson Kyle, ‘The biopolitics of human security’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 21:3 (2008), pp. 383401.

99 Detailed in Costas Douzinas , ‘The many faces of humanitarianism’, Parrhesia, 2 (2007), pp. 128 (pp. 1–5); on the polarization of ‘humanity’, see Mgbeoji Ikechi, ‘The civilized self and the barbaric other: Imperial delusions and the challenges of human security’, Third World Quarterly, 27:5 (2006), pp. 855869.

100 Detailed Hacking Ian, The Taming of Chance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).

101 On ‘authorizing force’, see Habermas’s discussion of Hanna Arendt’s conception of political power. Habermas Jürgen, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. William Rheg (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996), p. 148.

* This article benefitted from insightful comments by three anonymous reviewers, André Broome and Joel Quirk, and the participants of the Benchmarking in Global Governance (BiGG) Workshop held at the University of Warwick 12–14 March 2014. Any omissions or errors remain the author’s own responsibility. The research was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (grant number ES/K008684/1).

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Review of International Studies
  • ISSN: 0260-2105
  • EISSN: 1469-9044
  • URL: /core/journals/review-of-international-studies
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 22
Total number of PDF views: 343 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 379 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 25th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.